Black Pigeon Speaks
FROM THE SWEDISH COHORT STUDY
The difference we observed between the 1989 to 2003 cohort and the control group is that the trans cohort group accessed more mental health care, which is appropriate given the level of ongoing discrimination the group faces. What the data tells us is that things are getting measurably better and the issues we found affecting the 1973 to 1988 cohort group likely reflects a time when trans health and psychological care was less effective and social stigma was far worse.
Appeal to common sense
It’s time to examine one of the products of human science denial, a channel called “Black Pigeon Speaks”. With a video entitled “The Transgender – Normalising MENTAL ILLNESS”, it doesn’t take long to spot how many presuppositions went unnoticed and unquestioned, but if we listen to one particular section – well, you get the idea.
An appeal to common sense and authority is the least of it, if you break away from the binaries and categories that are empirical and then start to validate subjectivity, especially when the outcome are at odds with a certain morality, then people like Black Pigeon begin to start cooing.
He provides some sources, so let’s check them out. The problem is already apparent. Relying on the natural sciences alone is not sufficient as we have already discussed, relying only on empiricism only accounts for a small portion of the reality and facts, rejecting first person experience is the result of reductionism going too far, we may as well be machines.
Not off to a good start…
The first source is a link to “The New Observer”, a resource for the far right and is therefore propaganda by default as it will always ebb towards a morality based on natural science.
The Swedish Cohort Study
The Swedish study has been notoriously misrepresented by right wing activists, even when one of the co-authors clarified the conclusion that BPS reads aloud in his own video, the likes of Paul McHugh selectively extract with their quote mining tools and cherry picking baskets in order to suit their narrative.
Cecilia Dhejne : The aim of trans medical interventions is to bring a trans person’s body more inline with their gender identity, resulting in the measurable diminishment of their gender dysphoria. However trans people as a group also experience significant social oppression in the form of bullying, abuse, rape and hate crimes. Medical transition alone won’t resolve the effects of crushing social oppression: social anxiety, depression and posttraumatic stress.
What we’ve found is that treatment models which ignore the effect of cultural oppression and outright hate aren’t enough. We need to understand that our treatment models must be responsive to not only gender dysphoria, but the effects of anti-trans hate as well. That’s what improved care means.
The study in fact, supports the choice of individuals, it does not aim to prove via statistics, nor does it prove via data, that SRS should be banned, or discouraged, it actually supplies evidence that social norms and customs, human sciences denialism and poor after care are the contributing factors in trans-sexual suicide.
How Mr.Confused could interpret this as supporting an anti-trans agenda is down to his personal bias and appeal to authority, name dropping McHugh, as if some of his “credibility” could rub off on him. This throws out his comparison of gender dysphoria and anorexia nervosa by default, as at no point in his presentation does he provide any evidence that we are dealing with mentall illness. He leaves this undefined, once again appealing to common sense and taking the meaning as given, while ignoring the actual intentions of the authors of the paper knowing his propaganda will be supported without closer examination by his audience of wing nuts.
The co-author further explains : People who misuse the study always omit the fact that the study clearly states that it is not an evaluation of gender dysphoria treatment. If we look at the literature, we find that several recent studies conclude that WPATH Standards of Care compliant treatment decrease gender dysphoria and improves mental health.
To summarise Mr.Confused’s position, he is excluding his own and others bigotry from the causes of transgender oppression, which is notorious in the main contributing factors. Calling those who make personal choices mentally ill, is an outright bullying tactic and either woefully misinformed, or degenerately disingenuous.
Take a look at the comments on this video to see how transphobic people invert thier ignorance and try to isolate suicide as something that is ‘out of the blue’ without cause. It’s incredible! (Right click and view the image).
The next bigot bullet he misfires out of his beak is that of a pharmocological study of the drug pimozide. Once again, he misreads the conclusion, but given how he doesn’t know AN is used before singular, countable nouns which begin with vowel sounds and A is used before singular, countable nouns which begin with consonant sounds, it’s not surprising how his selective reading backs up his credulity.
Mr.Confused would like for this paper to be used as a basis for “ethical” treatment for “happiness”, where we will live in a dystopia of drugged individuals who are freed from their personal choices that he doesn’t feel we are trusted with.
An adult male patient with a borderline learning disability presented with cross-dressing and a strong wish to undergo a sex change, was given pimozide 2 mg daily, with a cessation of both cross-dressing and the wish for sex reassignment. When, after 1 year, the dose was reduced to 1 mg daily, there was a rapid return of the cross-dressing and the wish for sex reassignment. An increase in the dose again led to a remission which has been maintained since then.
Pharmacotherapy with pimozide should be considered in cases of doubtful gender dysphoria.
No patient would take a drug to suppress these feelings if they did not want to, the patient clearly did not want to make the transition, hence why he was defined as “doubtful”. Once again we can go back to the Sweden study where after care and social oppression are a factor, doubtful gender dysphoria is one such result of this. The patient did not want to go through with it and sought out an alternative solution.
The drug only works when taken, when you are not on it, you will still be gender dysphoric. This means the drugged state is not a cure, as we are not even talking about an illness, we are talking about identity. Being in a drugged state is not ones authentic state, it is a “corrected” state.
Mr. Confused has missed the fact that either way, ones’ personal choice is still liberated.
Black Pigeon Shit
This is a blatant selective reading, backed up with personal bias. It is not a significant study, as there is only one subject, which is not enough to state whether or not it would be effective, only that it worked for one person, but it’s not treating gender dysphoria, it’s treating doubtful gender dysphoria.
What is he suggesting? BPS wants us all to think that the media has covered this up, yet his preferred outlets of media, that being right-win anti-trans/gay/bi/lesbian mediums, also omit details. The moral of the story is that if you want depth, don’t go to the superficial for information.
Sex and gender confusion
BPS is the outcome of a conflation between sex and gender, McHugh has a strong empiricist position that reduces sex as a cause of gender, yet BPS cites from the American College of Paediatricians
“No one is born with a gender. Everyone is born with a biological sex. Gender (an awareness and sense of oneself as male or female) is a sociological and psychological concept; not an objective biological one”,
He once again shows his incredulity and personal ignorance while appealing to common sense and authority, while blatantly misrepresenting how this is a matter that is not possible to quantify through empiricism alone, phenomenology has its place as a better suited method for understanding gender.
In the same article, it states “A person’s belief that he or she is something they are not is, at best, a sign of confused thinking. When an otherwise healthy biological boy believes he is a girl, or an otherwise healthy biological girl believes she is a boy, an objective psychological problem exists that lies in the mind not the body, and it should be treated as such. These children suffer from gender dysphoria. Gender dysphoria (GD), formerly listed as Gender Identity Disorder (GID), is a recognized mental disorder in the most recent edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the American Psychiatric Association (DSM-V).5 The psychodynamic and social learning theories of GD/GID have never been disproved.”
This is ultimate problem within the current discourse regarding psychiatry, A 26 page PDF http://apps.bps.org.uk/_publicationfiles/consultation-responses/DSM-5%202011%20-%20BPS%20response.pdf where the British Psychological Society responds to the APA regarding the DSM, primarily it addresses how –
“Clients and the general public are negatively affected by the continued and continuous medicalisation of their natural and normal responses to their experiences; responses which undoubtedly have distressing consequences which demand helping responses, but which do not reflect illnesses so much as normal individual variation”
This is the central issue for all disorders, classifications and diagnoses with the DSM V, but what really has relevance to this inquiry is the following quote from the response to Gender Dysphoria specifically :
“We believe that classifying these problems as ‘illnesses’ misses the relational context of problems and the undeniable social causation of many such problems. For psychologists, our well-being and mental health stem from our frameworks of understanding of the world, frameworks which are themselves the product of the experiences and learning through our lives… Of particular concern are the subjective and socially normative aspects of sexual behaviour. We are very concerned at the inclusion of children and adolescents in this area. There is controversy in this particular area – the concept of a ‘diagnosis’ of a ‘psychiatric disorder’ disputed. Labelling people who need help as ‘ill’ may make supportive and therapeutic responses more difficult. ”
With so much controversy and ongoing debate as to what mental illness actually is and what exactly the role of psychiatry is regarding Gender Dysphoria, the elements of social norms, the affirmation of experience as a learning curve in life that should not be restricted to outdated, stigmatised and dogmatic views regarding what mental illness is, for example, if one does not wish to work in a job because it makes them depressed, yet the society they live in has strong work ethics propped up by utilitarian morality, no other options would be available to that person, they would be forced to like what the society likes and would be considered ill until they submit to the moral code. Morals are not truth.
America and psychiatry
America and psychiatry have had a rocky past, it wasn’t until the 70’s that homosexuality was changed from being a mental illness, which had a detrimental effect on mental health in those particular individuals. BPS is capitalising on the outcomes of abuse in society in order to back up his claim that gender dysphoria is a mental illness.
Swedish study indicates fall in suicide
He doesn’t show how the trend of suicide declines over the years 1973-2003, a displacement of 30 years. The fact that Dhejne disclosed the impact of poor after care and social oppression should reflect on her results how change takes time, it’s due to tolerance and improved health care, understanding and empathy that suicide is reduced with transsexualism.
There is much more in Black Pigeon Speak’s video that isn’t worth going over, I have already discussed the other issues at length in my previous video. In essence he shows how some people want to change back and how children are being brainwashed by PC Culture, but given the ongoing debate as to what the role of psychiatry is on these issues and how they are not universally accepted, whether or not psychology and psychiatry is learning about human behaviour, or if it’s trying to control it too much, is the central issue here. Some people make mistakes, yes, many times due to misdiagnosis of gender dyphsoria, or simply a change of mind. Individuality and gender are subject to many factors and are in flux, they are not fixed, but they are determined. Black Pigeon Speaks holds a terrific double standard in rejecting the human sciences outright, yet when it suits his narrative, he will gladly bash someone with the DSM.
One death is a tragedy, a million is a statistic
We can clearly see how Black Pigeon Speaks, like many of his supporters and anti-indivduals, rely too heavily on data and statistics without taking other historical factors into account, they rely too heavily on authority. Personal bias, intolerance and prejudice are not ways to understand this subject. Black Pigeon Speaks is too concerned with his own individuation and will to power to understand how this abjection works both ways, that we all seek power and that power always meets resistance, it’s a part of life, therefore as it’s tautological, it is not an issue. Apathy – you should try it sometime.
A very brief history of human and natural sciences in the last 200 years
Since the beginning of the 20th century, philosophy was beginning to go on a downward spiral due to the success of the natural sciences that were allowing the advancement of technology to aid the industrial revolution and to also push back the authority of the Catholic Church back into Vatican City, due to the evolutionary biology and various forms of social resistance, albeit despots and fascists themselves, who valued this new concrete empiricism and communitarian optimism.
Problems begin when natural sciences begin to utilise bad habits from religious conditioning, Herbert Spencer being the prime example of how discoveries in the natural world, were used as the basis for a new morality, which re-enforced the problems religion held over humanity in the form of Social Darwinism and Utilitarianism. Apparently we obey an objective law of survival of the fittest and we can only act if and only if, our actions lead to happiness.
Individuality is a relatively new concept for mankind and the advancement of the natural sciences cannot touch such a phenomenon, as it falls outside of what it considers to be testable. Up until the latter half of the 20th century, the good of the state, the will of the community over the individual and traditional family values reigned as the contents of happiness, it was only during and after the second world war that resistance began to subvert these values in the form of feminism, a fight for equality of the sexes.
It was not the natural sciences that played any part in this concept, it was the introduction of the human sciences, particularly the field of philosophy known as phenomenology, that allowed the individual to be at last examined and for the Platonist misconception of objectivity being “more real” than subjectivity was finally beginning to dissolve in the discourse, treating the first person perspective as equally valid as anything that the natural sciences would with its strong empiricism. Psychology, sociology and psychiatry are also products of the human sciences.
Unfortunately there are still some among us who partake in science denial, despite claiming they are lords of rational thought. Individuality involves abjection, the setting of boundaries that prohibit and reject authority and tradition that stand at odds with the utilitarian ethic of the search for happiness as something absolute and empirical. One can’t talk about individuality without relative realism, prediction goes out of the window and all possibilities begin to emerge.
A summary of power and resistance
Where ever there is power, there is resistance, power is a two way street, viewing it in a top down fashion is often an appeal to nature and misplaced concreteness that ultimately leads to nihilism and misanthropy. If it’s different to the ideal, then it’s trying to dominate.